The Brookhaven leader. [volume] (Brookhaven, Miss.) 1883-1891, 1887-08-11

DclIIqu tuN pOlIc iui AcSc1'' '''' Ai"1o W
Delinquent county tax for l555.. 25e 90
Delinquent polls for ISIS. ....... 735 90
Delinquent county tax for 1856. ll3 Is
Delinquent polls for lSo6........ Oh 90
Total. ...................S3 50, 936 81
Total of this amt collected
Sheriff. NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.. o9 "a
Subtract this 1914 from the total de-
linquency aud we have net loss to the
county, less officers commissions, of 49,
81 20.
This is rather bad showing Of
itself, but now We propose to show
what it has cost the county TO COL
lect the little that the Sheriff has
reported collected. The Legislature
of 1854 (see Acts Of 1884, chapter
3rd) in order TO secure the more
faithful collection Of delinquent
taxes throughout the State, passed
a law requiring sheriffs to make out
lists of the delinquent tax payers in
alphabetical order by Supervisors
districts and present them to the
Board of Supervisors, who should
cause to be prepared delinquent
stub receipt books. These receipts
were to be filled out by the clerk of
the Board from the delinquent lists
and turned over to the sheriff and
memoranda of each receipt issued
kept by the clerk on the stub.
These delinquent tax receipts are
then to be turned over to the Sheriff
by the clerk for collection, charged
up to him, and his receipt taken.
For this extra service the clerk may
he allowed by the Board the sum Of
$500 for each delinquent list thus
prepared. Now on this score, the
accounts stands against the sheriff 8
neglect and inefficiency thus:
Cost to county for delinquent tax
receipt books. Observation-Disclosures. s25 %
Aunt paid clerk for making out de-
linquent list for 1884. IS 90
Amt paid clerk for making out de-
linquent list for 1885. Is 90
Amt paid clerk for making out de-
linquent list for 1886 ....... Is 90
Total observation-disclosures. .$20U w
Total amt collected by sheriff on
these receipts. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. 81 10
Now subtract the amount COL
lected from the expense incurred in
furnishing him the lists for the
three years since the new law was
passed and we have a net loss to the
county on this score alone of $2l2.-
25. In other words, the books to
date show that the county has paid
out $4,000 of good money on an
uncertainty and gotten back for it
$37.75.
But this is not all. The act
of the Legislature above referred to
makes the sheriff liable on his
official bond for all the delinquent
tax receipts issued to him. He is
required on the first day Of every
December to make a statement I'M
der oath to the Chancery Clerk Of
all collections of delinquent taxes
and of all uncollected receipts in his
hands, when he IS credited with all
collections and the uncollected re-
ceipts returned to him again and
his receipt taken therefor. The
receipts issued for 1856 will not
have to be accounted for until the
first of next December, but how
does the account stand with refer
ence to the receipts for 1884 and
1852 The Chancery Clerks books
show that the sherlf1 has never re-
ported a cent on the delinquents for
1885, and never returned on the first
of last December the receipts for
either that year or 1884, as the law
required. This leaves the sheriff
liable on his bond as follows:
To delinquent receipts for 1884,
redelivered by clerk aud
never accounted for since. -. 81, 2o9 II
To delinquent receipts fol- 1885,
never accounted for........ 994 90
Total. NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.. s2,2O3 II
The sheriff must either account
for the receipts TO this amount or the
money they represent, and the
Board Of Supervisors are to blame
for not having already instituted